Two bodies found in Carroll County

[manifest destiny]

The judge hand-picked new attornies from her own court?? Wow. No bias in that...
Baldwin/Rozzi seem outlandish. The judge seems biased and the prosecution doesn't seem particularly confident in the case. Ugh.
I stand by my previous description of this case: ****-show.

 

[HoughMade]

The judge hand-picked new attornies from her own court?? Wow. No bias in that...
Baldwin/Rozzi seem outlandish. The judge seems biased and the prosecution doesn't seem particularly confident in the case. Ugh.
I stand by my previous description of this case: ****-show.

How do public defenders get appointed if not by the judge?

They are public defenders in Allen County, that's all "home court" means, and by all accounts, very good ones.

 

[manifest destiny]

How do public defenders get appointed if not by the judge?

They are public defenders in Allen County, that's all "home court" means, and by all accounts, very good ones.

Can Judge Gull pick lawyers from any county? If so, why would she pick from her "home court"? Were Baldwin/Rozzi from Allen Co.? (or maybe they were assigned by previous judge??) As to "very good ones", I'll have to take your word for it. According to Baldwin/Rozzi, Judge Gull wouldn't know a good defense lawyer due to her lack of practice in defending clients. I'm left wondering if they are right in their assessment.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Can Judge Gull pick lawyers from any county? If so, why would she pick from her "home court"? Were Baldwin/Rozzi from Allen Co.? (or maybe they were assigned by previous judge??) As to "very good ones", I'll have to take your word for it. According to Baldwin/Rozzi, Judge Gull wouldn't know a good defense lawyer due to her lack of practice in defending clients. I'm left wondering if they are right in their assessment.

No idea if the judge can pick from any county or not. The previous attorneys were assigned by the Carroll co. judge and at least one of them was from Carroll co.

As to why she would pick attorneys from her home county, they are ones she is familiar with would be my guess. It's either pick who you know or throw darts.

 

[injb]

No idea if the judge can pick from any county or not. The previous attorneys were assigned by the Carroll co. judge and at least one of them was from Carroll co.

As to why she would pick attorneys from her home county, they are ones she is familiar with would be my guess. It's either pick who you know or throw darts.

And if one of them just happens to have publicly endorsed the prosecution's key evidence, that's just a coincidence. Or is the the word I'm looking for "bonus"? Blame the darts I say!

 

[Timjoebillybob]

And if one of them just happens to have publicly endorsed the prosecution's key evidence, that's just a coincidence. Or is the the word I'm looking for "bonus"? Blame the darts I say!

Eh, he was explaining the forensics in general, not specifically in regards to this case. And he used a few wiggle words as well. " often, not always " "can be" etc.

So I wouldn't say he was endorsing the prosecutor's evidence.

And how do you know that's the prosecutions key evidence?

 

[injb]

Eh, he was explaining the forensics in general, not specifically in regards to this case. And he used a few wiggle words as well. " often, not always " "can be" etc.

So I wouldn't say he was endorsing the prosecutor's evidence.

And how do you know that's the prosecutions key evidence?

Fair enough, but it's hard to imagine how someone could agree with the legitimacy of this kind of evidence in general but someone find something wrong with it in this particular case. I would expect the defence in this case to start questioning the legitimacy of it in principle, for example:

...but it is safe to say that the discipline of tool-mark identification (ballistics) is anything but a science. The entire discipline has been under attack in courtrooms across this country as being unreliable and lacking any scientific validity,”

I know that nothing prevents the new team from taking this position, and hopefully the prosecutor won't be allowed to say in court that they previously sang a different tune. But it does indicate what they really think. I would not want to give up a lawyer who thinks this stuff is junk science and is prepared to argue that in court, for one who thinks it's generally solid but maybe it was handled wrongly in my particular case.

As regards whether it's key evidence, that's generally how it has been referred to so far. It's the basis of the arrest warrant and of his subsequent detention. If it was excluded the whole case could fall apart.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Fair enough, but it's hard to imagine how someone could agree with the legitimacy of this kind of evidence in general but someone find something wrong with it in this particular case. I would expect the defence in this case to start questioning the legitimacy of it in principle, for example:



I know that nothing prevents the new team from taking this position, and hopefully the prosecutor won't be allowed to say in court that they previously sang a different tune. But it does indicate what they really think. I would not want to give up a lawyer who thinks this stuff is junk science and is prepared to argue that in court, for one who thinks it's generally solid but maybe it was handled wrongly in my particular case.

As regards whether it's key evidence, that's generally how it has been referred to so far. It's the basis of the arrest warrant and of his subsequent detention. If it was excluded the whole case could fall apart.

Yeah I would expect a layer who was working on a case to say the same. Especially in a motion to exclude it. Whether they believed it or not. I also wouldn't be surprised that a lawyer who has no expectation of being involved would say what Scremin said.

It was part of the basis for the warrant, but lawyers have said that prosecutors don't generally put all their cards on the table in the beginning. Whether they have more

 

[HoughMade]

More Ind. Sup. Ct. filings- specifically about the removal of the defense attorneys.

Same arguments.

Side tidbit- the LEO the defense (Rozzi and Baldwin) pointed to as the guy pushing the Odinist angle has issued a statement:

“No one in law enforcement believes Abby and Libby were killed in a ritual sacrifice. That is the defense twisting facts for sensationalism.”

Take that for what you will.

 

[printcraft]

 

[manifest destiny]

An unspent round found between two people who were stabbed to death just doesn't seem very persuasive to me. And that's before questioning the science of microscopinc ejector/extractor marks. I continue to believe the prosecution has more/better evidence.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

An unspent round found between two people who were stabbed to death just doesn't seem very persuasive to me. And that's before questioning the science of microscopinc ejector/extractor marks. I continue to believe the prosecution has more/better evidence.

My theory is he racked the slide as an intimidation tactic and didn't realize it was already chambered and dropped the live round on the ground.

 

[MindfulMan]

My theory is he racked the slide as an intimidation tactic and didn't realize it was already chambered and dropped the live round on the ground.

I had a similar, but slightly different theory. One of the girls was said to be a "fighter" (bless her), and I wondered if she grabbed the pistol .... and in an ensuing short struggle, the slide was racked.
Your theory is possibly more likely, but I doubt that we'll ever really know.

 

[JTScribe]

Thoughts on the Supreme Court’s order to produce the transcript of what was discussed in chambers?

 

[injb]

Thoughts on the Supreme Court’s order to produce the transcript of what was discussed in chambers?

What we know so far:

* the judge ordered them to cease work on his case a week before the hearing (I saw the email thread that confirmed this somewhere but can't find it now)
* she then ordered Allen transported from prison to his court hearing even though she knew he could not appear at that hearing.
* she brought in TV cameras for this hearing, and only this one
* she had a private conversation with the attorneys
* she then claimed publicly that they had withdrawn, to her surprise, and thus she had no choice but to send Allen back

Now she doesn't want that private conversation revealed. She clearly planned the whole thing.

 

[HoughMade]

What we know so far:

* the judge ordered them to cease work on his case a week before the hearing (I saw the email thread that confirmed this somewhere but can't find it now)
* she then ordered Allen transported from prison to his court hearing even though she knew he could not appear at that hearing.
* she brought in TV cameras for this hearing, and only this one
* she had a private conversation with the attorneys
* she then claimed publicly that they had withdrawn, to her surprise, and thus she had no choice but to send Allen back

Now she doesn't want that private conversation revealed. She clearly planned the whole thing.

That's A position on the course of events.

- If the Judge had evidence of gross negligence in the defense, telling them to pause work until their position in the case is determined is completely understandable and obviously very temporary.

- The hearing was a general status conference. There were several motions pending. The status of the defense attorneys became the predominant issue. A criminal defendant has a constitutional right to attend a hearing on any "critical stage" of his proceeding. Of course he was transported. What was going to happen in open court, in his presence was not known until Oct. 19. I think this is clear. That the judge was going to conduct some proceedings in chambers does not mean there would not be a hearing in open court. Every time there is a significant hearing, the defendant has to be transported to court and then sent back. That this happens and sometimes there is no substantive hearing takes place is not uncommon. The only difference here is the media coverage and the fact that the trip is from Westville to Fort Wayne. Usually it's in the same county or the next county over where they have more jail space.

- The defense are the ones who wanted television cameras for "all matters". They filed that motion on September 14th. The Judge granted the defense motion and set strict parameters. These were violated by media sources. The Judge decided to not allow broadcast of the next hearing.

- Having a private conversation with counsel only is 100% normal.

- Even the defense attorneys agree that the said they would withdraw, but they now say that was forced upon them. We await facts from both sides to try to get at the truth. We have not heard the whole story yet. I have said this before- IF the judge improperly threatened the defense attorneys or otherwise improperly pressured them to withdraw- there need to be consequences for that, but we do not know that yet...unless we have simply decided to believe one account.

- And- the Supreme Court did not order the transcript to be produced. It ordered that a response to the Motion for Transcript be filed or, if no response, produce the transcript. That doesn't indicate anything to me about the Ind. Sup. Ct. prejudging this in any way. I don't know the ins or outs about in-chambers transcripts, nor do I know if the attorneys' version of their interaction with the court reporter is accurate. I remain in wait and see mode.

 

[manifest destiny]

Judge Gull's delay in responding and/or producing the transcript seems odd to this lay person. I view some of her manners and decisions to have shown bias against the defendant, his guilt/innocence not withstanding. It wouldn't surprise me if both the judge and defense counsel are shown to have been a wee-bit outside the norms, however one might define that.

 

[printcraft]

Judge Gull's delay in responding and/or producing the transcript seems odd to this lay person. I view some of her manners and decisions to have shown bias against the defendant, his guilt/innocence not withstanding. It wouldn't surprise me if both the judge and defense counsel are shown to have been a wee-bit outside the norms, however one might define that.

A lot of narcissistic, weirdo (alcoholics) in the profession... you're going to have strange happenings.

 

[HoughMade]

A lot of narcissistic, weirdo (alcoholics) in the profession... you're going to have strange happenings.

Nacissistic
Weirdo
Alcoholic.

...well, I'm a tea-totaler, but other than that....

 

[Farmerjon]

HoughMade, thank you for your explanations from your experiences. Not to change the subject, but any of the judges on this case also involved in the past Indy experience a few years back?